↓ Skip to main content

Applying perceptual learning to achieve practical changes in vision

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, October 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
52 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
108 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Applying perceptual learning to achieve practical changes in vision
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, October 2014
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01166
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jenni Deveau, Aaron R. Seitz

Abstract

Research of visual perceptual learning has illuminated the flexibility of processing in the visual system and provides insights into therapeutic approaches to remediating some components of low vision. A key observation from research of perceptual learning is that effects of training are often highly specific to the attributes of the trained stimuli. This observation has been a blessing to basic research, providing important constraints to models of learning, but is a curse to translational research, which has the goal of creating therapies that generalize widely across visual tasks and stimuli. Here we suggest that the curse of specificity can be overcome by adopting a different experimental framework than is standard in the field. Namely, translational studies should integrate many approaches together and sacrifice mechanistic understanding to gain clinical relevance. To validate this argument, we review research from our lab and others, and also present new data, that together shows how perceptual learning on basic stimuli can lead to improvements on standard vision tests as well as real world vision use such as improved reading and even improved sports performance. Furthermore, we show evidence that this integrative approach to perceptual learning can ameliorate effects of presbyopia and provides promise to improve visual function for individuals suffering from low vision.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 108 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Hungary 1 <1%
China 1 <1%
Unknown 105 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 17%
Student > Master 17 16%
Researcher 13 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 7%
Student > Bachelor 6 6%
Other 20 19%
Unknown 26 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 29 27%
Neuroscience 16 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 4%
Other 15 14%
Unknown 33 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 October 2014.
All research outputs
#13,886,300
of 24,323,543 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#12,684
of 32,736 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#120,242
of 260,588 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#209
of 373 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,323,543 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 32,736 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 260,588 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 373 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.